Application Receipt Date: 060511 Prior Review Prior Review Date: None I. Applicant Request Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: See DD Form 293. II. Were Proper Discharge and Separation Authority procedures followed? Yes No Tender Offer: ????? See Attachments: Legal Medical Minority Opinion Exhibits III. Original Character of Discharge Unit CDR Recommended Discharge: Date: NIF Discharge Received: Date: 960202 Chapter: 10 AR: 635-200 Reason: In Lieu Of Trial By Court-Martial RE: SPD: KFS Unit/Location: B Company 477th Signal Bn 15th Signal Bde Fort Gordon, GA 30905 Time Lost: AWOL-11 days (951222-951230) and (960103-960104) mode of return to military control NIF. Applicant was confined by military authorities for 9 days (960123-960202). Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): NIF ______________________________________________________________________ The applicant received a General Officer's Memorandum of Reprimand for driving while intoxicated, (890918). Court-Martials (Charges/Dates/Punishment): NIF Counseling Records Available: Yes No IV. Soldier’s Overall Record DOB: 640711 Current ENL Date: 950222 Current ENL Term: 6 Years ????? Current ENL Service: 00 Yrs, 11Mos, 10Days ????? Total Service: 14 Yrs, 01Mos, 20 Days ????? Previous Discharges: USAR-811121-820713/NA RA-820714-850512/HD RA-850513-890927/HD RA-890728-920316/HD RA-920317-950221/HD Highest Grade: E6 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No MOS: 31R10 Multichannel Transmission System Opeator/Maintainer GT: 100 EDU: HS Grad Overseas: Germany Combat: SWA (900830-910328) Decorations/Awards: ARCOM, AAM, AGCM (4), NDSM, SWASM w/2 BSS, NCOPDR w/2, ASR, OSR (4) V. Post-Discharge Activity Home of Record: Current Address: Post Service Accomplishments: None Listed VI. Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation a. Facts and Circumstances: The applicant’s record is void of the specific facts and circumstances concerning the events that led to his discharge from the Army. However, the record does contain a properly constituted DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty), which was not authenticated by the applicant's signature. His DD Form 214 indicates that he was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 10, AR 635-200, for the good of the service-in lieu of court-martial with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions. Furthermore, the DD Form 214 shows a Separation Code of KFS ( i.e., for the good of the service-in lieu of trial by court-martial) with a reentry eligibility (RE) code of "3." On 1 February 1996, DA, HQ, United States Army Signal Center, Fort Gordon, GA, discharged the applicant from the Regular Army, effective date: 2 February 1996. The applicant was to be reduced to the lowest enlisted rank. b. Legal Basis for Separation: Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Chapter 10 of that regulation provides, in pertinent part, that a member who has committed an offense or offenses for which the authorized punishment includes a punitive discharge may submit a request for a discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial. The request may be submitted at any time after charges have been preferred and must include the individual’s admission of guilt. Army policy states that although an honorable or general discharge is authorized, a discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally considered appropriate. c. Response to Issues, Recommendation and Rationale: After a careful review of all the applicant’s available records for the period of enlistment under review and the issues he submitted, the analyst recommend that relief be denied in this case. The applicant’s record is void of the specific facts and circumstances concerning the events that led to his discharge from the Army. The analyst noted that the applicant’s record contains a properly constituted DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty), which was not authenticated by the applicant's signature. This document identifies the reason and characterization of the discharge and the analyst is presumming Government regularity in the discharge process. The evidence of record shows the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 10, AR 635-200, for the good of the service-in lieu of trial by court-martial, with an under other than honorable conditions discharge. In connection with such a discharge, the applicant was charged with the commission of an offense punishable under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), with a punitive discharge. Procedurally, the applicant was required to consult with defense counsel and to voluntarily, and in writing, request separation from the Army in lieu of trial by court-martial. In doing so, the applicant admitted guilt to the stipulated or lesser-included offenses under the UCMJ. In the absence of information to the contrary, it is presumed that all requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process. It is also noted that the characterization of service for this type of discharge is normally under other than honorable conditions and that the applicant would have been aware of that prior to requesting discharge. Therefore, the reason for discharge and the characterization of service remains both proper and equitable. VII. Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing Type of Hearing: Date: 070307 Location: Washington, DC Did the Applicant Testify? Yes No Counsel: NA Witnesses/Observers: NA Exhibits Submitted: NA VIII. Board Decision The discharge was: Proper Improper Equitable Inequitable The characterization of service was: Proper Improper Equitable Inequitable The narrative reasons were: Equitable Inequitable DRB voting record: Change No change (Character) Change No change (Reason) (Board member names available upon request) IX. Board Discussion, Determination, and Recommendation After carefully examining the applicant’s record of service during the period of enlistment under review and considering the analyst’s recommendation and rationale, the Board determined that the discharge was too harsh and as a result it is now inequitable. The Board does not condone the applicant’s misconduct; however, determined that the the overall length and quality of the applicant’s service, to include his combat service, and the time that has elasped since his discharge mitigated the discrediting entries in his service record. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant partial relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to general, under honorable conditions. The Board determined that the reason for discharge was both proper and equitable, and voted not to change it. This action entails a restoration of grade to SSG/E6 Case report reviewed and verified by: Mr. Kenneth McFarley, Examiner X. Board Action Directed No Change Issue a new DD Form 214 Change Characterization to: Change Reason to: None Other: NA RE Code: Grade Restoration: No Yes Grade: SSG/E6 XI. Certification Signature and Date Approval Authority: MARK E. COLLINS Colonel, U.S. Army President, Army Discharge Review Board Official: MARY E. SHAW DATE: 070308 Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army Chief, Secretary Recorder ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number AR20060006788 Applicant Name: Mr. ______________________________________________________________________ Page 6 of 6 pages